Yesterday Glenn Simpson founder of Fusion GPS and former investigative reporter for the New York Times was interviewed by staffers of the Senate
judiciary committee. He turned over forty thousand pages of documents and said he was ok with them releasing transcripts of his statement. He was not
provided one but states the committee has the right to release them if they so desire.
I'm betting they don't have any such desire at this moment.
In a related story Christopher Steele named names on the previously only identified by letters sources for his allegations within the dossier when he
was interviewed by the FBI .

It seems to me that everybody is very interested in this dossier that some want to write off.
And it seems that each of these investigations is proceeding in a direction that is making trouble for the Whitehouse and making the president
nervous. They really don't seem to be dying or crumbling that's certain.

Now he has another issue in that staffers in the Senate who were advised of the conversations between McConnell and trump have stated that trump is
furious and has roared and railed at McConnell that he's not protecting him from the Senate judiciary committee investigation. Which when added to the
Comey testimony about trump asking him to look the other way with the Flynn investigation is another page in the obstruction of justice case.

Some interesting developments for the supposed to be dying Russia probe.

Well for one he wasn't a spy anymore. And for another Fusion employed him. The RNC and the DNC employed Fusion to get opposition research a term you
guys are fond of. Fusion is a US company .
No illegal activity.

The private investigator behind the now-infamous Trump “dossier” spent nearly 10 hours behind closed doors answering questions from Senate
investigators on Tuesday, but his attorney says he did not reveal who paid his company for the research.

Glenn Simpson, a former Wall Street Journal reporter who cofounded the private research firm Fusion GPS that was hired initially by Republicans and
later worked with Democrats to explore then-candidate Donald Trump’s past, was called to Capitol Hill to answer questions about the 35-page document
that featured uncorroborated and salacious allegations about the business mogul’s ties to Russia.

MI6, the British spy agency. Our closest allied spy agency who we have worked hand in hand, almost as a single entity with, since WW2.

But like Silly Ol Me pointed out, he was retired from the agency, and thus, it was perfectly legal for him to work for private companies, including
ones in the U.S.

It actually happens a lot, both ways. Former and retired agents of both the CIA and MI6 will often work for private contractors in either country,
mainly as consultants. There are a number of ex CIA, for example, that work for private British security and threat assessment firms.

This is not only perfectly legal, many times, governments on both sides will hire these companies to consult, or contract specific work for.

In this case, the Republicans initially were the ones who contacted Fusion for opposition research, a.k.a digging up the dirt on your opponent. Not
only legal, but a fundamental part of campaigning. In the majority of elections, opposition research aims to dig up political donors, voting records,
local ties to corruption scandals, ect. This time, they found something more than mud to sling.

The Russia probe was never dying. As we all know, the media works the distraction game too. North Korea, Charlottesville, ect. But all that did was
take media attention from the probe. Correction. PROBES. Mueller's probe isn't the only one, I think, last time I looked, there are five separate
investigations other than Mueller's going down.

And now with Mitch McConnel turning on Trump, the biggest barrier to all of these investigations has just removed, so expect them to actually not only
expand, but end up encompassing more than just Trump.

NOW PLAYING
Man behind Trump dossier meets with Senate investigators
The former British spy who put together an unverified dossier of explosive allegations about President Trump during last year’s campaign has been
ordered to give a deposition in a multi-million-dollar libel case brought against a media outlet that published the document.

Former MI-6 British Intelligence Officer Christopher Steele is fighting the decision by U.S. District Court Judge Ursula Ungaro, of the Southern
District of Florida that he must answer questions in the suit against Buzzfeed. A lawyer directly involved in the case said the issue will likely be
argued before the British courts where a similar libel case is being heard.

Steele's lawyers unsuccessfully asked Ungaro to reject the request.

“That dispute will move to London, where we expect Mr. Steele will continue to try to avoid being deposed," Fray-Witzer said.

“Buzzfeed published the dossier - and the comments about our clients - without having made any effort whatsoever to determine if the things said
about our clients were true. They don't even claim otherwise."

This was about "clicks," not about responsible reporting."

"Fusion's initial production of documents consisted of solely of headlines from publicly available news reports and more than 7,500 pages of blank
paper,” Grassley spokesman Taylor Foy said. “Fusion eventually provided a copy of the same unverified dossier that's been publicly available since
January, and a privilege log that raises more questions than it answers."

I don't really know what to think of this anymore. I feel that if the dossier were to be accurate, I could understand why some people would not want
it to come out. But, why would the people behind the dossier not want to cooperate?
If it's true or even partially true, wouldn't they be eager to prove this factual and remove the president?

I may be understanding this wrong. I know that will be quickly pointed out.

But, my main concern is why would they submit 7,500 pages of blank paper?

The difference is, these are two separate cases/investigations. But Steele and Fusion did, in fact, cooperate with, and turn 40,000 pages of documents
related to the dossier and Russia scandal. But because it was a congressional hearing behind closed doors, in front of a panel of congress members
with high level security clearances, the documents only seen by a limited number of people. Because congress is investigating a potential national
security hazard.

In this case, Fusion is more willing to cooperate, because congress will, at least, keep the sources and collection methods secret. Remember, many of
the sources in the dossier are still active intel agents, still working actively in the field. The last thing you want is those people's names
publicly outed, because you compromise whatever mission they are on, and endanger them. Some of those leaks are people not in the intel community
anymore, but still with very tight ties to the Kremlin, who leak valuable info. You don't want those names getting out, and those people being
arrested and executed, because then our intel community has lost a valuable source of inside info to the Kremlin.

The buzzfeed case, however, is a civil case, being seen by civilians with no clearance, and because it is a civil case, all records and documents from
the case are made publicly available as a matter of record. Thus, all the sources and methods of collection would also be made publicly available,
compromising multiple missions and programs. On top of that, the buzzfeed case is purely a civil one.

House Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes lashed out at Attorney General Jeff Sessions in a letter where he threatened Sessions with a public
grilling if he doesn't produce documents about the Russia dossier to the House intelligence committee.

Nunes, who despite stepping aside from directing the House Russia investigation has been leading his own separate investigation, accused Sessions and
the FBI of stonewalling him repeatedly in a September 1 letter obtained by CNN. In the letter, he threatened to drag Sessions and FBI Director
Christopher Wray before the committee for a public grilling and hold them in contempt of Congress -- a jailable offense -- if they don't hand over the
documents.

To Anti-America CNN, the RUSSIA-TRUMP investigation is still more important than hurricane IRMA, DACA, Tax Reform...everything. www.cnn.com...

Publicly that's the case, though in the UK it'd be a major breach of national security to collude with 'ex' intel. Not saying he was a plant or
anything, and unfamiliar with US law, but it seems odd for the FBI to approach someone involved in illegal corporate espionage that seems untraceable
prior to 2008 (not put much effort into it but HL 3299 LIMITED doesn't appear on the usual databases and can't find company status to work out what
law loopholes apply to be able to access confidential info - is easy to do with Orbis Business Intelligence Limited though).

Could be innocently using the tactics learnt in his work for SIS to obscure the efforts to help obtain objective reports, could be a SIS/FSB front
(highly unlikely but a huge risk to national security I'm confused as to why it would be legal and why FBI would consider persuing it - it's not as if
they wouldn't have the info/illegal corporate espionage conducted by SIS using the cover name 'British Council' automatically via Patriot Act and the
like.

No idea what the truth is, but something is slightly odd here - experience says it's probably something painfully boring and mundane instead of
nefarious, but still an interesting choice.

Congress and Robert Mueller seem to have much interest in this "faked" dossier.
Everybody is interested in seeing it.
Now why, if as you guys say, the information is fake, would all these investigators be so interested in it?

Formally charged dear. He is sitting in the oval peeing his pants right now but he's not on trial and he hasn't been charged with anything.
When I say accused I mean it as a legal term. He is not accused of anything right now.
Though I'm betting he is considered a person of interest.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.